State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Silicon Institute Of Technology, vs For Emx Advertising And Promotion (Pvt) ... on 10 August, 2020
STATECONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSALCOMMISSION,ODISHA,CUTTACK
C.D.CASE NO. 31 OF 2005
Silicon Institute of Technology,
Having its registered office at Silicon
Hills, Patia, Po/Ps - Chandrasekharpur,
Bhubaneswar, District - Khurda, represented
through its Managing Trustee,
Ramananda Mishra, aged about 42 years,
Son of Sri Pitambar Mishra
... Complainant
Vrs.
1. For'emX Advertising and Promotion (Pvt) Ltd.,
Having its reregistered office at A/.180, Saheed Nagar,
Bhubaneswar, Dist - Khurda, represented by its
Managing Director
2. Debasis Pattanaik,
Son of Bharat Chandra Pattanaik,
Managing Director,
For'emX Advertising and promotion (Pvt.) Ltd.,
Residing at Flat No.1, Block - II, Core - D,
LIC Colony, Maitri Vihar, At/Po/Ps - Bhubaneswar,
District - Khurda
... Opp.Parties
____________
For the complainant : M/s S.S.Das & Associates
For OP No. 1 : None
For OP No.2 : M/s B.P.Sarangi& Associates
_____________
P R E S E N T:
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.P.CHOUDHURY,PRESIDENT
AND
DR. S.MOHANTY,MEMBER
2
DATED THE 10th AUGUST,2020
ORDER
DR. D.P. CHOUDHURY,J., PRESIDENT This is an application u/s 12 read with Section 17 of erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the "Act") filed by the complainant against the OPs seeking compensation of Rs.22,99,500/- along with 9% interest per annum thereon from the OPs.
2. The unfolded story of the complainant is that the complainant's college being represented by the Managing Trustee to organise the annual function of the institute on 10.1.2005 was searching for an event Manager. The OPs offered to hold the event on receipt of the consideration of Rs.1,55,000/- to which an agreement was made between the complainant and the OPs. Pursuant to such agreement complainant paid consideration amount of Rs.77,500/- at first and Rs.50,000/- later on and it was agreed that after successful function rest of Rs.27,500/- would be paid. It was also agreed between the parties that the OPs would arrange the entire function including 3 arrangement of dance and musical group from Kolkata. OPs have received at first Rs.77,500/- through cheque dated 13.12.2004 and also received Rs.50,000/- on 04.1.2005 through cheque payment. It is alleged inter alia that on 10.1.2005 at 1.30 PM OP No.2 informed the complainant that he has failed to arrange the performance and requested to defer the function. Since the programme has already been scheduled, the complainant was put into harassment. It is also alleged inter alia that the OPs had also not made any arrangement of installing dais and chairs etc. The complainant had to make local arrangement for the annual day function. Due to inaction of the OPs the programme was not a successful one but however it was managed by the complainant. So the complainant filed a complaint praying for refund of Rs.1,27,500/- and the expenses of Rs.22,000/- incurred by him and further prayed for compensation for the loss of goodwill, mental agony etc. and as such in toto claimed Rs.22,99,500/- from the OPs and filed the complaint.
3. Service of notice against OP No.1 returned with report that 4 there is no such firm but OP No.2 who is the Managing Director of the said event management firm appears through lawyer but did not file written version.
4. We have perused the complaint and the documents annexed with it. No doubt the agreement clearly supports the story of the complainant that the OPs undertook to arrange event for the annual cultural day for the complainant's college. It is also available from Clause - 7 of agreement that if the OPs failed to lead any performance they would inform 15 days before the programme. Annexures - 2 and 3 show that the complainant has paid Rs.73,547/- on 13.12.2004 after deducting TDS from Rs.77,500/- and also paid Rs.47,450/- after deducting TDS on 4.1.2005. Not only this but also Annexure - 3 shows that on 10.1.2005 at 1.30 PM OP No.2 informed the complainant that he is unable to present star performance "Vaisali Samant" and requested to reschedule the programme. On 18.1.2005 the lawyer's notice was issued to OP No.2. All these documents and the submissions remained uncontroverted by the OPs as no 5 written version is filed.
5. In view of the above, we are of the view that the complaint succeeds against the OPs. OP Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to pay jointly and severally an amount of Rs.1,27,500/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e., 2.3.2005 and also compensation of Rs.1.00 lac towards mental agony and expenses incurred for completion of the programme to the complainant within a period of 30 days from today failing which the same would be payable with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment made.
Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties.
..............................
(Dr.D.P.Choudhury,J President I agree.
.....................
(Dr.S.Mohanty)
Cuttack Member
August 10, 2020